About your Search

20130126
20130203
STATION
CSPAN 9
CSPAN2 5
CNN 1
CNNW 1
MSNBC 1
MSNBCW 1
WTTG 1
LANGUAGE
English 22
Search Results 0 to 21 of about 22 (some duplicates have been removed)
like nato. nato now has 26, 27 members. is a totally different thing. those are areas i am not so sure the security council of the un wouldn't be better off doing large things or have some variations. nato is always seeing significant cracks, afghanistan is not the only test, but quite frankly half of the soviet union imploded in 1989. we asked, nato members asked each other, asked the institution if there was still a requirement for nato because the soviet tanks were no longer a threat rolling across the boulder gap in germany so it could be -- why do we need it? i think what it is about is the next president should work with our friends and allies in trying to restructure some of these institutions to make the relevant to the twenty-first century, make the relevant to these new challenges, give you another example, foreign aid. bob gates's speaking kansas state, what bob gates was talking about was not just foreign aid, wasn't just talking about aid programs, sacks of sugar. what he was talking about, this is twenty-first century thinking, investment in stability and security, invest
admired in the senate. i worked with him closely when i was an ambassador to n.a.t.o. i found him to always be very fair and very thoughtful. we have a very tough challenge with iran. iran is resisting negotiations. they won't even agree to show up at the p-5 negotiations with the the other countries. if they don't show up with the negotiations it will be give for the obama administration to go not go down that use of force which no one wants to go down. it's important that we send a tough message to iran and that is that the use of force is on the table unless they negotiate fairly. i'm with the president of wanting to negotiate with diplomacy. we need an united team in washington, so i hope he's confirmed. i hope he's confirmed expeditiously in the senate. >> jennifer: we're all hoping that. we are hoping to send a strong message and a strong team to represent us across the world. we thank you for coming to the war room. former u.s. ambassador nicholas burns. coming up, congress gets to pick it's spots in dealing with gun violence. unfortunately, community leaders on the front l
a plate of funky fermented soy beans. nato is sticky and stinky and what about dirt? >> that looks good. >> from a fame use restaurant in denmark. >> and with that almond milk, we have coco and coffee. >> step into the light, the blue light. >> reporter: and remember how good you felt under the blue lights in the basement? different blue lights but feels as good. >> reporter: she uses it in acne treatment. >> you get a two for one. >> and buy one in a box for urn $100 online. close your eyes and get that sunkist kick start when it's cold and gray outside. joyce evans, fox news. >> you know what? i don't have any blows. the sun is out and chilly. the sun is great. >> and that make the difference. >> and we love summertime. >> yes. >> and we do. >> and if that is cold, we have some colors. >> and changing, right? is any winds will be gusty, too and that is in through the day tomorrow and some snow, too and there is a lot of snow lovers. many people come up and tell me where is our snow? snow is coming overnight and that is going to be a warmer system. okay, and not really going to -- goin
. before he could come in and torched and gauzy and kill all the rebels we and our nato allies intervened to stop that. no, in the case of syria we have not intervened, but certainly other outside powers have. the rebels of been able to get support, for example, from the gulf states which keeps them from being simply swept off -- swept off the board. in turn he gets support from a run. and the moment the war is more less stalemated because both sides have some degree of support, but it is not overwhelming. very unpopular, but the insurgents have not been able to push him out of the weight. but -- and this goes back to a point was making earlier about the incredible importance of legitimacy. i would say for most syrians he lacks legitimacy, especially for the senate majority of the country because he is part of a minority. however, he does have support in the community. he does have support among some of the other minorities because they're afraid of what would happen if their work to take over. he is able to cling to power with a small degree of legitimacy left. the rebels, in turn, are a
closely, closely with our lo longtime allies of nato and our friends and with allies and p t partners and friends in other regions of the world. at the same time we will continue to focus on challenges in the middle east and north africa where we have clear national interests. rather as recognition the united states has been and always will be a pacific power. in the asian pacific power it is increasingly vital to america's security and economic interests. that's why we must become even more engage d in the region ove the incoming years. doing all this and much more will require smart and strategic budget decisions. i have made it clear i share leon panetta's and our service chief's serious concerns about the impact sequestration would have on our armed forces. and as someone who has run businesses, i know that the uncertainty and turbulence of the current budget climate makes it much more difficult to manage the pentagon's resources and our national security. if confirmed, i'm committed to effectively and efficiently using every single taxpayer dollar the right way to maintain the st
to the parliamentarians of nato. these parliamentarians were very supportive of american drone policy and many of the nato countries are developing their own programs. i asked in english baroness, what will she say when china or iran vaporizes someone on the london bridge because they believe they are a threat to their country? what would you possibly say to object when the argument for drones that we now have the authority to take out anyone or anything in other countries that threaten us? it is anathema under international law. after world war two, we developed an international law that developed stability where countries have to take steps before they go to war. they cannot act unilaterally. the obama and bush administrations have torn that structure down. what is left is the state of nature. the american government that played such a key role in developing this international law is returning the world to a state of nature where the strongest country does whatever it wants. you have to ask yourself -- what happens when we are no longer the strongest country? what happens when there is another country t
that this is a peacekeeping role for nato. that is what that was all about. >> my time has expired. i would like to ask you one more question. i understand you made a statement indicating that there is no justification for palestinian suicide bombers. but that there's also no justification for israel to "keep palestinians caged up like animals." did you say that and, if so, do you stand by that today? >> well, i said it. and remember the context for when i said it. >> do you believe today that israel keeps palestinians caged up like animals? >> if i had an opportunity to edit that, i would like to go back. i said many things over many years. it was a larger context. the frustration and what is happening that is not in israel's interest, to find ways to find peace and security to israel. if i had a chance to go back and edit it, i would. i regret having used those words. >> thank you. >> senator lee. senator kane. >> it was good to see with my dear friend senator warner, a decorated navy and marine veteran from world war ii and korean war, a longtime member of this committee. it was good to see him here. he
chiefly the u.n., the imf the world bank and nato that protected our interests, defending universal values and benefited peoples and nations around the world. yet it is undeniable that a handful of major powers did end up controlling those institutions combat setting norms and shaping international affairs. now two decades after the end of the cold war, we faced a different world. more countries than ever have a voice in global debate. we see more passed power opening up as nations gain influence through the strength of their economies rather than their military and political and technological changes are empowering nonstate actors like activists, corporations and terrorist networks. at the same time we face challenges from financial contagion to climate change to human and wildlife trafficking that defy unilateral solutions. as president obama's said, the old post-war architecture is crumbling under the weight of new threats. said the geometry of global power has become more distributed and diffused as the challenges we face have become more complex and crosscutting. so the question we as
including working at the n.s.c. on detail, at nato headquarters, brought at the middle east and the pentagon. he was advisor to four presidents, president obama asked him to lead his afghanistan-pakistan policy review in early 2009 and he did that for a couple of months before happily, for us, returning to brookings. bruce has written already two books in the time he's been here, actually a third is about to come out, i'll mention that in just a second, but the first two were about al qaeda and then about the u.s.-pakistan relationship "the deadly embrace." . his new book, coming out next month is "avoiding armageddon" and it's the story about the u.s.-india-pakistan relationship and crisis management over the last half century or so. general stan mcchrystal is a 1976 graduate of west point. spent 34 years in the u.s. army. retiring as a four-star general in the summer of 2010. he has been commander in afghanistan. he was the director of the joint staff. but perhaps in military circles, most of all, as i mentioned, this five-year period at joint special operations command makes him memorable
lended to this. she's been one of the driving forces behind nato's no-fly zone over libya in order to prevent qadhafi from massacring his own people. and through deft diplomacy, she has slowly opened burma to the outside world. she's encouraging them to free political prisoners, hold parliamentary elections and finally permit foreign investment. and it's happening before our eyes. and, of course, she has taken special interest in the poorest nation in the western hemisphe hemisphere, an island nation right off of the east coast of the united states, less than an hour and a half flight time from miami. that's the island of haiti. the island nation of haiti on what is an island that christopher columbus was expected to have been the island that he landed, hispaniola now encompassing haiti and the dominican republic. and she has made haiti one of the top foreign policy projects, helping the impoverished island build back better after the devastating earthquake that killed over a quarter million people. in no small measure has her husband -- president clinton -- been a part of that att
's border? who secures israel's border? it has been suggested that this is a peacekeeping role for nato. that is what that was all about. >> my time has expired. i would like to ask you one more question. i understand you may be statement indicating that there is no justification for palestinian suicide bombers. but that there's also no justification for israel to "keep palestinians caged up like animals." did you say that and, if so, do you stand by that today? >> well, i said it. and remember the context for when i said it. >> do you believe today that israel kids palestinians caged up like animals? >> if i had in a party to edit that, i would like to go bad -- and -- if i had an opportunity to edit that, i would like to go back. i said many things over many years. it was a larger context. the frustration and what is happening that is not in israel's interest, to find ways to find peace and security to israel. if i had a chance to go back and ended it, i would. i regret having used those words. >> thank you. >> senator lee. senator kane. >> it was good to see with my dear friend senat
for the u.n., world bank, and nato that defended universal values and benefited peoples and nations around the world. a handful of major powers did end up controlling those institutions and shaping international affairs. two decades after the end of the cold war, we face a different war. more countries than ever have a voice in global debate. nations gain influence through the strength of their economies rather than their militaries. nine state actors are empowered. we faced challenges from financial contagion to climate change to human and wildlife trafficking that spill across borders and the fight unilateral solutions. the old postwar architecture is crumbling under the weight of new threats. the geometry has become more distributed and defused as the challenges we face have become more complex and crosscutting. the question we ask every day is what does this mean for america? how can we invents our interests and also appalled a just rule based international order, a system that does provide clearer rules of the road to fair labor standards. we have to be smart about how we use our powe
.n., the i.m.f., the world bank and nato, that benefited peoples and nation around the world but it is undeniable that a handful of major powers did end up controlling those institutions, setting norms and shaping international affairs. now, two decades after the end of the cold war, we face a different world. more countries than ever have a voice in global debates. we see more paths to power opening up as nations gain influence through the strength of their economies rather than their militaries and political and technological changes are empowering non-state actors like activists, corporations and terrorist networks. at the same time, we face challenges from financial contagion to climate change to human and wildlife trafficking that's still across borders and defy unilateral solutions. has said, thebama old post-war architecture is crumbling under the weight of new threats, so the geometry of global power has become more distributed and diffuse as the challenges we face have become more complex and cross-cutting. so the question we ask ourselves every day is what does this
as nato took the mission, the mission evolved into something different. but it is important to remember how it started. it is absolutely, i think, a fair question to say why did you act in libya in this circumstance under the doctrine, if you will, or the principle, if you will, of the responsibility to protect noncombat taxes -- b combat taxes, why did you choose to do that in libya and not choose -- or choose to not do that in other places? each circumstance, of course, is significantly different. and it has to be measured on its own merits. it also addresses, i think, the limits of power. military power does not solve all problems. and importantly in libya, there was aup security council resolution -- a u.n. security council resolution that called for this mission and authorized all available means. in syria there is no such security council resolution that would, that would provide the legal underpinning for an operation in syria similar to what was conducted in libya. so it's a great question, but there are significant differences, i think. i should caveat all of that by reminding
this rebalancing even as we continue to work closely, closely with our longtime allies of nato and our friends and with allies and partners and friends of other regions of the world. at the same time, we will continue to focus on challenges in the middle east and north africa where were have clear national interests. rather, it's a recognition that the united states has been and always will be a pacific power. and the asia-pacific is vital to america's interests. doing all of this, and much more, will require smart and strategic budget decisions. i have made it clear, i share leon panetta's and our service chief's serious concerns about the impact sequestration would have on our armed forces. and as someone who has run businesses i know that the uncertainty and turbulence of the current budget climate makes it much more difficult to manage the pentagon's resources in our national security. if confirmed i'm committed to effectively and efficiently using every single taxpayer's dollar the right way. to maintenance the strongest military in the world and to working with congress to ensure the dep
-time allies of nato, and our friend, and with allies and partners and friends in other raoegs of th region -gs of the world. at the same time we will focus on challenges in the middle east and north africa where we have clear national interests. it's a recognition that the united states has been and always will be a pacific power. in the asian make of area, it's increasingly vital to america's security and economic interest, that's why we must become even more engaged in the region over the coming years. doing all this and much more will require smart and stra taoepblg is budget decisions. i have made it clear i share pan pan's and our service chief's serious concerns about the impact sequestration would have on our armed forces. as someone who has run businesses i know that the uncertainty and turbulence of the current budget climate makes it much more difficult to manage the pentagon's resources and our national security. if confirmed i'm committed to effectively and efficiently, using every single taxpayers' dollar the right way to maintain the strongest military in the world, and to workin
longtime allies of nato and our friends and with allies and partners and friends in other regions of the world. at the same time we'll continue to focus on challenges in the middle east and north africa where we have clear national interests. rather as a recognition that the united states has been and always will be a pacific power. in the asia pacific area is increasingly vital to america's security and economic interests. that's why we must become even more engaged in the region over the incoming years. during all of this and much more will require smart and strategic budget decisions. i have made it clear i'm sure leon panetta and the concerns of the impact just ration will have on our armed forces. as someone who has run businesses, i know that the uncertainty and turbulence of the current budget climate makes it much more difficult to manage the pentagon's resources and our national security. if confirmed i'm committed to effectively and efficiently using every single taxpayers' dollars the right way, to maintain the strongest military in the world and to working with congres
. the president moved and decided he was going to become engaged to nato in ways that met our interests at the time it got the job done. i thought it was smart. the way he approached that was very effective and the results were exactly what we wanted to cheat. -- achieve. we could tell if we did this -- results were exactly what we wanted to achieve. we recommended no-fly. those things were put into place. i think the american people approved of the way that was handled. we had just come out of iraq. the aftermath of all of these places, we need to spend some time on this. there is a monumental transformation taking place. this is the biggest upheaval of the bill that part of the world -- in that part of the world since the ottoman empire. many of the country's -- countries lines were drawn in relatively arbitrary ways. people were put in places of power. it is a highly sectarian, divided, tribal part of the world. i am not sure every policy has always been as sensitive or thoughtful about that as it ought to be. >> i want to clarify. on my state about libya, i was -- statement about li
allies of nato and our friends and with allies and partners and friends in other regions of the world. at the same time we'll continue to focus on challenges in the middle east and north africa where we have clear national interests. rather as a recognition that the united states has been and always will be a pacific power. in the asia pacific area is increasingly vital to america's security and economic interests. that's why we must become even more engaged in the region over the incoming years. during all of this and much more will require smart and strategic budget decisions. i have made it clear i'm sure leon panetta and the concerns of the impact just ration will have on our armed forces. as someone who has run businesses, i know that the uncertainty and turbulence of the current budget climate makes it much more difficult to manage the pentagon's resources and our national security. if confirmed i'm committed to effectively and efficiently using every single taxpayers' dollars the right way, to maintain the strongest military in the world and to working with congress to ensure t
Search Results 0 to 21 of about 22 (some duplicates have been removed)

Terms of Use (10 Mar 2001)